Liberty

I agree. Commodity business + capital intensive + known for shady operators + many technical reasons why you can't be sure what you're buying + dependent on macro factors + nobody can predict how long cycles will last. Seems like a 12-foot hurdle to me, but I know many are good enough to pull it off. I just know I should stay away even when things look attractive.

I'm writing this from my iPad Air on iOS 8. Very nice so far!

They're are plenty of homes, people are just speculating...buying 2nd and 3rd properties Yes, there's more condos being built in toronto than in the rest of north-america combined IIRC. Prices aren't high because of a lack of supply, it's a sentiment thing.

Some stats here: http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/credit-card-data/credit-card-transaction-volume-statistics/ http://assets.nerdwallet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/transaction-volume-2006-2010.jpg http://assets.nerdwallet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/spend-by-network-2006-20101.jpg

It's really annoying. They're basically just trying to fill whatever boxes are empty in their spreadsheet models, trying to come up with their EPS target for the next quarter... Every time someone asks about long-term strategy, competitive advantages, etc, I almost fall out of my chair..

That's their last play, pretty much. There are rumors that go back and forth between Salix and JAZZ... I kind of doubt that they could justify not having a board vote, especially if it's an inversion. And if it's not an inversion, I doubt they can argue that it's a more value-creating deal than what Valeant is offering. They'd also probably have to pay quite the premium because Salix or JAZZ probably isn't interested in selling itself just to make it convenient for the Allergan management to keep their jobs, so they'd need quite the incentive... And if I was Allergan's management, I'd be worried about shareholder lawsuits for lack of diligence in their fiduciary duty. They still haven't even talked with Valeant, and certainly haven't got anything that would require a NDA, so how are they supposed to have made an informed decision?

Interesting post by Gruber on the Apple Watch: http://daringfireball.net/2014/09/apple_watch I wonder what the margins would be on a $5,000 gold watch? :)

I also only get cashback cards. Thanks for pointing out the Amazon one. The canadian version has 2% cashback, not 3%, but I buy enough books and other stuff there that it's probably worth getting over time. There's also a 25$ gift certificate when you sign up.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/16/allergan-valeant-pharms-shareholders-idUSL3N0RH1TT20140916

http://ir.valeant.com/investor-relations/news-releases/news-release-details/2014/Valeant-Announces-Redemption-of-All-of-the-Outstanding-5000-Million-Aggregate-Principal-Amount-of-its-675-Senior-Notes-due-2017/default.aspx

Thank you, much appreciated!

I sold mine because I realized that I didn't want to own businesses that were dependent on commodity prices and multi-year cycles anymore. Lots of money to be made that way, I'm sure, but it's not what I want right now, even if Altius is the best model for one of these that I've seen so far. Too many factors are out of management's hands. And needing to do big deals to unlock asset value, and needing lots of capex before any cash flows back, that's tough (even if it isn't Altius that is paying for the capex, someone has to spend all that money, and often it just won't happen for reasons that are totally out of anyone's control). I prefer businesses that are asset-light, non-cyclical, and with free-cash coming in the door all the time with an easily repeatable formula for value creation (ie. you don't need to put together a new entirely unique deal out of thin air every time, just keep doing what you've been doing before -- some buybacks, some M&A, some organic growth, whatever). This makes the job of a good capital allocator much easier, and IMO increases the chances of success. Altius is like the old Leucadia (and I mean that as a compliment). The level of difficulty is much higher. Dalton is very smart and will probably pull it off like Cummings and Steinberg did, but I had other opportunities that I felt more comfortable with. If history is a guide, this probably means that ALS will be $30 soon, so brace yourselves ;)

Real value investing histpers only follow Ben Franklin, he's the OG.

It's the first I hear about this no-limit thing. Must be a specific kind of AMEX and not all of them. Couldn't find an answer googling quickly, but this seems to imply that there is a limit: http://about.americanexpress.com/cr/pb5.aspx But my understanding was that AMEX was the one actually lending you the money, while Visa and Mastercard are more payment processors and it's the issuing banks (Bank of America, etc) that take the risk with lending. If that's correct, it makes a lot of sense for AMEX to be a lot more careful about who it lends to.

I didn't realize those were the only two choices. Well, that explains it! :D

You know Buffett is big when he even has Buffett-hipsters who have to publicly complain about people liking him too much ;)

https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/09/15Apple-Announces-Record-Pre-orders-for-iPhone-6-iPhone-6-Plus-Top-Four-Million-in-First-24-Hours.html

That's the funniest thing about a non-funny subject that I've read in a while :D

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/09/15/danaher-agrees-to-acquire-swiss-dental-implant-maker/

Exactly. that's what I was saying here: http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/john-malone-gets-hit-by-the-proverbial-bus/msg188140/#msg188140 But your version is more concise.

Exactly, they target the higher-end customers and put barriers up to keep lower-end ones away (one goes with the other -- harder to target higher-end if they see every schmuck with one). Hence, most of their customers are higher-end and spend more, but they have fewer customers than VISA and Mastercard.

So I was re-reading Buffett's 1991 Notre Dame speech and thought this part was interesting for this discussion:

Buffett makes more than one kind of investment. When he invested in Capital Cities, it was definitely a bet on Murphy, and I'm not sure if he ever invested in Teledyne, but I'm pretty sure that Buffett thought the main thing that made Teledyne likely to overperform was the capital allocation skills of Singleton. Heck, a lot of his insurance stuff is likely a bet on Ajit Jain... The businesses also have to be good - an the Malone businesses are - but sometimes the thing that actually seals the deal and makes you buy is the jockey.

As Alice Schroeder said, Buffett is very literal when he speaks. I think he means it when he says that you don't need to be super smart to be a good investor. That's literally what he means. A good investor. But to be like him? (a lot more than just a good investor) Yeah, you have to be really really smart, basically. Being really really smart doesn't necessarily mean doing complicated things all the time, but smart people know that simple doesn't mean easy. The rest (when they talk about themselves) is just humility, and possibly Buffett underestimating himself because he is so monomaniacal while most other smart people know about more fields (like Munger, who Buffett no doubts admire for knowing about a more varied range of topics than he does).

You scared me with that title (from the forum hub page all that was visible was " Re: John Malone gets hit...") :-\ I suggest you start it with "What if...".